So RVD's pot references were back in full force on Raw this past Monday. Thery're obviously pushing the fact too, since JR and Lawler were sure to mention it later in the show.
I think it's pretty funny myself being a smoker and everyone I watched it with was going wild over it (could have something to do with the fact that they were smokers too, haha). It was most definitely the highlight of the show in this apartment. I know it's still quite early, but do you guys think this will stay consistent or will they phase it out like before? They need to do something to bring in new viewers or bring back old ones and this should at least get the pot smoking demo watching again.
I don't see them keeping it up past that one interview. Too bad. I'd love to see him wear some of those AWESOME singlets he wore in ECW, which he's not allowed to wear in WWE because they have "420" written all over them.
And I still think it was just REALLY weird listening to Jim Ross try and get pot over in his commentary.
Maybe I'm just a complete idiot, but I never quite figured out when pot smoking became the most important reason to push a wrestler... of course, I haven't figured out why pot smoking seems to be such a big deal, especially among readers of this board, either.
Not trying to come off as some straight-edge prick or anything, I just feel like I have to be missing something here.
I think if we look at this from a realistic standpoint, Vince is not going to let a "Pro-Drug" gimmick start up. Vince doesn't want the PTC knocking on his door, yet again. The flack they'd catch for something like that isn't needed and I don't see a big "Stoner" demographic tuning in because RVD happens to do special things on his own time. The Attitude era is over, and that is the sort of gimmick that needs to stay gone with it. Also, maybe I'm just a straight-edge prick like BoromirMark, but when did it become cool to claim you were a pothead proudly?
Originally posted by HrdCoreJoeI think if we look at this from a realistic standpoint, Vince is not going to let a "Pro-Drug" gimmick start up. Vince doesn't want the PTC knocking on his door, yet again. The flack they'd catch for something like that isn't needed and I don't see a big "Stoner" demographic tuning in because RVD happens to do special things on his own time.
If I remember correctly the PTC can't get involved in WWE business anymore. The WWE won some lawsuit against them and the PTC had to put an apology on their website, pay the WWE a couple million dollars and stay out of all future business.
RVD as a pothead as an angle? The guy has the worst mic presence in the WWE and you want to make it worse by making him a pot head? Ugh. If anything, throw some caffeine in him and then see what happens. A hopped up RVD might be better than a laid back RVD.
Big brother representative: Now, Mr. Simpson, may I ask why you're here? Homer's Brain: Don't say revenge. Don't say revenge. Homer: Ummm... revenge? Homer's Brain: Okay, that's it. I'm outta here. [Sound FX: step step step step step... slam]
I personally feel alcohol is way more harmful than pot (only difference is the legality), yet its okay to see Austin chug down beers every second, so I wouldn't mind a pothead gimmick... besides, Road Dogg, X-Pac, and Godfather made pot references all the time...
"Considering everything else that the WWE runs, wrestling is not for you if you're that easily offended."
That's just it, I'm NOT easily offended, heh. It's just the things that do offend me, I hate with a passion. I thought the necrophilia angle was pure comic gold, like a cheesy B-horror movie. I'm very tolerable of those type of things, what gets me is law-breakers and moral questioners. I can't abide by them. We're born with an innate sense of right and wrong, and to question that just because you want to get high at the expense of your health is really idiotic and selfish.
You'll note I didn't support alcohol, either, BTW. And I absolutely LOVE Kevin Smith movies, BONG! How can this be, you might ask. Because potheads are complete and utter buffoons. That naturally means they are hilarious to watch, while almost earning pity for the waste of their life.
On the actual subject, heh, there's no way a pro-drug angle/gimmick would ever work. It might get some of the stoner fans cheering, yes, but it'd alienate a lot of the audience and if you think Mushnick's annoying, wait til you see some of the editorial's that would crop up for this.
"People use freedom of speech to make up for freedom of thought, which they lack." - Kierkegaard
I don't think he'd be that great, actually. Let him stick to what he IS good at - writing novels and autobiographies. Even then, those who've taken the time to read Tietam Brown know that he doesn't have a consistent style.